USA > Indiana > The history of Indiana > Part 38
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42
23 James A. Cravens, Lew Wallace, An Autobiography, I, 169.
505
BATTLE OF BUENA VISTA
battle line 100 yards away. The Indiana regiment, only 360 strong, was under the immediate command of its old colonel, Gen. Joseph Lane. As the Mexicans defiled from the ravine the Indianians dropped to their knees and the strange battle began, the Indianians out- numbered eighteen to one. A battery of five guns sup- ported the Hoosiers. While the battle was going on, General Lane sought to make the American fire more effective by moving his men up closer. Just at this time a second column of Mexicans appeared on the left. Seeing these, or thinking the battle lost, and that it was best to save what men he could, Col. William A. Bowles, who was at the opposite end of the line from General Lane, gave the order to retreat. Thus, while the left of the line started forward in obedience to General Lane's order, the right began to fall back at the command of its colonel.
The retreat soon became a run. Twenty of the men never stopped till they reached the buildings of the ranch at Buena Vista. General Lane, Lieutenant Colonel W. R. Haddon, and Colonel Bowles succeeded in reforming 190 of them, who, along with the Third Indiana and a Mississippi regiment under Col. Jeffer- son Davis, returned to the field in time to join in the final attack on the charging Mexicans. Under their own officer, Lieutenant Colonel Haddon, and formed on their own colors, they helped as bravely as any other troops to restore the lost battle.
These details have been given in order to show exactly what part the Second Indiana took in this bat- tle. General Taylor, in his official report, said: "The Second Indiana, which had fallen back, could not be rallied and took no further part in the action, except a handful of men, who, under its gallant Colonel Bowles, joined the Mississippi regiment and did good service." In another place General Taylor in his report said: "Arkansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Texas, and
506
HISTORY OF INDIANA
some Indiana men had fought hard all this dreadful day." As evidence of this latter his own official report shows that the Second Regiment lost 107 of its 360 men; 90 of these fell in the morning, while opposing more than 7,000 Mexicans on the open field. The time during which they stood under fire is shown by the fact that they fired twenty rounds each. Santa Anna in his official report said his men were on the point of re- treating when the American line broke. Had not the stupid blunder been made by the officers of the Second Regiment, the Mexicans might have been routed and the glory of the battle instead of its disgrace would have belonged to the Indianians.
The fault lies deper. The officers of the volunteers were all petty politicians. Indiana had competent men, trained for war, but through political juggling not one of them was called into service. Of the three colonels and one brigadier general, not one could have led a company through the manual of arms. Two of them later learned the manual at least, but Colonel Bowles, of the unfortunate Second, did not. His election to the colonelcy was very questionable, and he had never pretended to drill his regiment. Gen. Joseph Lane and Col. James H. Lane quarreled incessantly, and a duel between them was pending at the time of the Battle of Buena Vista. The First Regiment was left at the mouth of the Rio Grande and forbidden even to move its camp out of the swamp. Seventy of its members were buried there, where the wind and tide soon re- moved the shallow covering of sand and left their bodies to the birds and wild animals. From this same Camp Belknap 259 men were sent home sick. Many of them died on the way. All three of the regiments felt, with what seems at this date and distance good reason, that they had been intentionally neglected by the commander-in-chief. As an explanation, it may be that General Taylor did not care to risk his fortunes in
507
THE LAST REGIMENTS
the hands of officers selected as he and General Wool knew the Indiana officers had been. At any rate, the regiments that went away to war carrying flags made and presented by patriotic women, feasted and toasted at every opportunity, hauled in wagons by admiring farmers and finally praised by every expectant poli- tician, returned a sickly, sorry, quarrelsome wreck with doubtful reputation for soldierly discipline and bravery. The fault, however, was not with the men.24
The war was not over. April 24 Governor Whit- comb received a requisition for a fourth regiment. This was organized at Camp Clark June 16, under Col. Willis A. Gorman, and dispatched from New Albany, June 27. They were ordered to Brazos to join General Taylor. September 3 they were at the mouth of the Rio Grande on their way to Vera Cruz; September 16 they arrived at Vera Cruz.
August 31 a requisition for a fifth regiment was received. This was organized at Madison and mustered into service October 22, under James H. Lane, formerly
24 For the facts in this tangled chapter of our history, see Lew Wallace, An Autobiography, I, 163, 193. The New Albany Democrat, Aug. 24, 1848; this latter paper contains the corres- pondence between General Taylor and John Defrees and George G. Dunn; Oran Perry, Indiana in the Mexican War, passim; Official reports are to be found in the Documents of the Mexican War; Documentary Journal of Indiana, reports of the Adjutant General; manuscript correspondence of George G. Dunn contains many letters bearing on this question. A detailed report by Lieutenant Colonel W. R. Haddon is in the Western Sun, Aug .. 1848. The best study of this period is a manuscript entitled "Indiana and the Mexican War," by R. C. Buley. As soon as Taylor was nominated for the Presidency Indiana politicians began to criticise him for his report on the Second Regiment. A court martial exonerated the soldiers from cowardice and shifted the blame to Bowles and Lane, but the quarrel con- tinued. The net result of this and the Dunning affair was to leave a cloud on the reputation of the State and its soldiers. The fault was in the petty politics that put Bowles and Lane in such responsible positions and in 1848 used the record for par- tisan purposes.
508
HISTORY OF INDIANA
colonel of the Third. It embarked for Vera Cruz, October 31.25 It reached that place November 24, after experiencing a severe squall on the gulf. By the last of July, 1848, these troops had all returned, having ac- quitted themselves nobly in the march on Mexico. Gen. Joseph Lane won especial honors in this campaign. A season of barbecues followed, the battle flags were pre- sented to the State amid solemn ceremonials, and the chapter was closed. The State had furnished promptly a small army of five thousand men, who had marched and fought creditably.
25 Documentary Journal, 1847-8, 290-91.
CHAPTER XX
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1850
§ 88 EARLY AGITATION FOR REVISION
BY the terms of the constitution of 1816 it was pro- vided that every twelve years a referendum vote should be taken on the advisability or necessity of calling a constitutional convention. It was the generally accepted theory then, as laid down in the writings of Jefferson, that one generation had no moral or legal right to bind by constitutional limitation a succeeding generation. It is hardly probable that the framers of the constitu- tion intended by this provision to prevent the citizens of Indiana from calling a constitutional convention at any time they chose. It is more probable that it was intended by this referendum to insure each generation two chances of holding a convention in spite of an op- posing General Assembly. It must be kept in mind that the immediate followers of Jefferson looked with favor upon the constitutional convention as one of the most effective institutions of popular democracy.1
There appears to have been very little demand for a new convention for a long time after 1816. As one of the opponents of calling a convention said in 1847, "The people of Indiana are attached to their constitu- tion. It is the work of their forefathers. Under it for thirty years they have enjoyed a degree of prosperity unsurpassed by any State in the Union."2
The cause for calling a constitutional convention
1 Prof. C. B. Coleman in Indiana Magazine of History, VII, 41; Jacob Piatt Dunn, Ibid., VII, 100.
2 George W. Julian, in Indiana House of Representatives. Tri-Weekly State Journal, Jan. 15, 1847.
510
HISTORY OF INDIANA
among English speaking people is always found to be insistent and acting through considerable periods of time. The American people generally have not lightly called into activity such revolutionary bodies. There has always been some deepseated dissatisfaction. There were several minor defects in the working of the State and local governments under the first constitution, but the chief ground of complaint was the working of the General Assembly. The State had been led by this body into a gigantic system of internal improvements in which it had lost more than twelve million dollars. Its reputation became deeply involved in this debt. Indiana bonds were hawked about the eastern markets as low as seventeen cents on the dollar. A gang of hungry office-holders had been and still were robbing it; and the General Assembly seemed unable or unwill- ing to shake them off. The annual meeting of the General Assembly seemed to be an unnecessary expense and the annual elections kept the people in a political turmoil. Moreover, the General Assembly was neglect- ing the affairs of the State and giving its time and at- tention to hundreds of petty private affairs. A reading of the titles of the special laws of any session will give one an idea of the petty jobbery that was carried on by means of special laws.
With all this dissatisfaction the demand for a con- vention, if we are to take the votes on the subject as evidence, was not strong. There is scarcely any men- tion of the vote on the subject up till 1846. A referen- dum had, however, been taken in 1823, only seven years after the constitution went into effect.3 The vote was decisive against calling a convention. In 1828, four years later, the regular twelve year referendum was
3 Laws of Indiana, 1822, 121. Each voter was directed by this law to indicate on the bottom of his ballot before he handed it in, whether or not he favored calling a constitutional con- vention.
511
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
taken with a similar result.4 During the following twelve years there was little agitation on the subject. The General Assembly of 1845, however, took up the subject . There was a spirited demand by a few ener- getic member for a convention. They succeeded in passing a law authorizing a referendum on the subject at the ensuing August election.5 This was six years earlier than the constitution demanded a referendum, but the friends of the movement urged with force that the people had an undeniable and inalienable right to call a constitutional convention whenever they pleased.
The result of this referendum vote was that out of a total of 126,133 votes cast at the State election there were 33,173 for a convention, and 28,843 opposed. A majority of all the voters had not expressed themselves on the subject.6
When the vote was reported to the General Assem- bly, it provoked a serious debate." It was generally agreed that the vote was not decisive; that it did not warrant the General Assembly in calling the proposed convention, but many members favored submitting the question again to a popular vote at the next August election. Other members opposed all agitation on the subject as calculated to bring politcal disquiet and unrest. The times, it was pointed out, were especially dangerous. The State was almost bankrupt, taxes were high, and times were hard. Of all times the present, it was urged, would be the worst to agitate a change in the fundamental law.8
4 Laws of Indiana, 1827, 22.
5 Laws of Indiana, 1845, 97. This convention should have power to "alter, revise, or amend the constitution."
6 Tri-weekly State Journal, Jan. 15, 1847.
7 Tri-weekly State Journal, Jan. 13, and Jan. 15, 1847. The debate is given almost in full. Henry Secrest of Putnam county, John Yaryan, Cyrus L. Dunham of Washington and George W. Julian of Wayne, were the principal speakers.
8 The committee to which it was referred in the House favored a convention. The debates are given in the State Journal, Jan.
512
HISTORY OF INDIANA
In spite of the efforts of a determined group of members, the question was not favored by the Assem- bly. It is noticeable that what might be called the pro- fessional politicians avoided taking sides in this dis- cussion. The referendum in 1846 was not mentioned in the leading papers, and evidently was not discussed on the stump. The governor in reporting the result of the vote in his annual message made no recommenda- tion that might be construed into a position.
The demand for a convention, however, did not cease. The Democratic party, in general, favored the proposition. The court practice, they said, was espe- cially costly. Probate courts and associate judges were popularly regarded as worse than useless-they were meddlesome. The justices had once been the chief officers of the county, but since a board of commission- ers had taken their duties, they had become petty poli- ticians, valuable only to those who wished to bribe a court or corrupt a jury.
Many good citizens, regardless of party, also looked upon the appointing power of the governor as a source of much evil. They thought that the auditor, treas- 13, 1847. The minority, all Whigs, made an unfavorable report. This was written by John Dowling, a Whig editor of Terre Haute. The following editorial of the Indiana State Journal, Jan. 5, 1847, sums up the opposition or Whig argument: "A change in the fundamental law should not be made for trivial causes. It ought to be made only to abrogate some great wrong resulting from its provisions. Frequent changes impair the respect in which a constitution, to be valuable, ought to be held by the people. We hold that when a mode of changing the con- stitution is provided by the constitution itself that any other mode is wrong. It must be done by that mode. Any other course is revolution itself. Our constitution has such a provi- sion. The present assembly nor the past has any right to call a convention or submit the question to a vote. The vote of last August was not a warrant for a convention. It was less than half that polled for governor. This legislature clearly has no right to make provisions for calling a convention. There is no de- mand. No part of it is oppressive. It is better than can be made now." Then comes the prosperity plea. It is a fine state- ment of the conservative argument against change.
513
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
urer, and other State officers should be elected by the people rather than by the General Assembly. The recent attempt by the governor to barter nominations to the supreme court for a seat in the United States Senate had given a concrete point to the general de- mand to limit the appointing power of the governors. By 1849 Governor Whitcomb, sure of his promotion to the United States Senate, came out openly for a con- vention in his annual message. He no doubt put his finger on the weakest point in the government under the old constitution when he emphasized the evil of private and local legislation. In the annual volumes of laws for the previous four or five sessions the local laws had outnumbered the general five or six to one. In the volume of 1849 there are 343 acts published as "Local Laws" and 273 as "General Laws," of the latter over 200 being strictly "local." The time of the whole session was consumed in political jockeying and log rolling.9 The annual volume of laws noted above con- tained 616 laws and thirty-seven joint resolutions.10
9 Prof. James A. Woodburn in Indiana Magazine of History, X, 238.
10 One of these laws changed the name of Belsora Barsheba Inglewright to Belsora Barsheba Thompson. Another permitted Charity Ann Wise to sue for divorce in Marion county, instead of in her home county. The following editorial stated the Whig position : "The General Assembly will have to prepare for the Constitutional Convention. We hope an early day for an elec- tion of delegates and the meeting may be fixed. These mem- bers ought to be elected at the April election and meet in June. Let the result be voted, on in October. No party consideration ought to hold in selecting delegates. If the election is held in August it will be partisan. We voted for a Constitutional Con- vention because we wanted the following changes: Biennial "sessions; election of judges and all other officers; a general banking law; a homestead exemption law, fines to go to the school funds of the township. Most important of all, elections by the legislature are corrupt. The course of Governor Whit- comb ought to settle such elections forever."
514
HISTORY OF INDIANA
§ 89 ORGANIZING THE CONVENTION
THE General Assembly of 1848 took up the con- vention question and passed an act submitting the question of calling a constitutional convention to the voters.11 A large majority of the votes cast at the en- suing August election were in favor of calling a con- vention.12 The following General Assembly by act ap- proved, January 18, 1850, ordered an election of dele- gates. The election was held at the same time and in all essential parts was the same as an election of mem- bers of the General Assembly. There were 150 dele- gates chosen from the same districts as the members of the House and Senate, except in two unimportant districts.13 There was little interest in the campaign as far as electing delegates was concerned. It was hoped by many to make the elections non-partisan, but such was not the case as a rule. It seems true, however, that the Whigs, being in a minority, took considerably less political interest in the election than the Demo- crats.
A caucus of the Whig members of the General As- sembly declared in favor of a constitutional convention and especially urged that the following changes be made in the constitution. All officers should be elected by popular vote; the General Assembly should be pro-
11 Laws of Indiana, 1848, 36. The first bill introduced in the House and the fourth in the Senate were the convention bills. The records bear no evidence of the discussion, if any was had. The votes usually stood about 60 to 40 in the House. The only parts of the act that seem to have been debated related to the number and selection of the delegates. One facetious repre- sentative, in answer to the evident tenor of this discussion, moved that the House appoint each member a delegate. They finally did the nearest possible thing to this by making each Assembly district a delegate district.
12 The vote stood 81,500 for and 57,418 against. The total vote cast for the candidates for governor was 147,232 (no re- port from Fayette). The affirmative majority for the convention was thus about 8,000.
13 Laws of Indiana, 1849, 20.
515
CONVENTION OF 1850
hibited from borrowing money except for urgent neces- sities ; the county seminary funds should be transferred to the fund for common schools; the General Assembly should meet biennially ; local legislation should be pro- hibited; the number of offices should be reduced and the establishment of new ones forbidden ; a homestead exemption should be provided; and more encourage- ment should be given to agriculture, mining, and manu- facturing.14
In the county of Marion the Whigs offered to divide the ticket equally and make no contest, but the Demo- crats refused.15 In Jefferson county the Whigs com- promised on a ticket of two Whigs and one Democrat. There were some other instances in which fusion tickets were elected without contest, but fusion was not general. Of the 50 delegates from senatorial districts 33 were Democrats and 17 were Whigs; of the 100 delegates from representative districts 64 were Demo- crats and 36 Whigs. Of the 50 State senators elected at the time 33 were Democrats and 17 Whigs; of the representatives 62 were Democrats and 38 Whigs. It will thus be seen that the political affiliations of the members of the General Assembly and the constitu- tional convention were the same.
The delegates, 150 in number, assembled in the capitol building, October 7, 1850, and were organized by the secretary of State, Charles H. Test.16 They were a representative body of citizens. The best known men of the State at the time, however, were not pres- ent. From our distance, one would say that Robert Dale Owen, Alvin P. Hovey, Thomas A. Hendricks, W. S. Holman, Schuyler Colfax and Horace P. Biddle were among its most distinguished members, but they
14 Indiana Tri-weekly Journal, May 1, 1850.
15 Indiana State Journal, May 1, 1850.
16 Indiana Tri-weekly Journal, Jan. 3, 1850. A list of the delegates with their districts and party affiliations is given in the State Journal, Jan. 4, 1851.
516
HISTORY OF INDIANA
were young and mostly without wide reputation at the time. The really noted men of the convention as they gathered together for the first time, were Thomas D. Walpole, Abel Pepper, Daniel Kelso, James G. Reed, David Kilgore, Ross Smiley, Michael G. Bright, Wil- liam M. Dunn, George W. Carr, David Wallace, Jacob Page Chapman, James Rariden and John I. Morrison. Seventy-five of the members had served in the General Assembly, thirteen of whom had sat in the last session. Twenty-five more made this the stepping stone to later legislative service. Fourteen saw service in the United States Congress; two later became governors, while one was an ex-governor. There were seven well-known editors, three of whom came from Indianapolis. The great Whig lawyers of the State were noticeably absent. A widespread prejudice against educated men existed at the time. There were three graduates of the State University and perhaps as many more were graduates of other colleges.
§ 90 POLITICS OF THE CONVENTION
THE spirit of Jackson controlled the convention. Daniel Reed, a delegate of Monroe and a professor in the State University, referred to Jackson as "a man of as remarkable sagacity as ever lived."17 As a con- sequence of this Jacksonian influence it was attempted to strengthen democracy among the people by bringing the government nearer the voter. The secretary, treas- urer, and auditor of State, formerly appointed by the General Assembly, were made elective. To these were added the new office of superintendent of public in- struction to be filled by popular election. Besides the above, the judges of the supreme and circuit courts were made elective by the people for six-year terms.18
17 Debates and Proceedings of the Convention, 221.
18 A significant provision in this connection was the section providing that the State publish the decisions of the supreme
517
CONVENTION POLITICS
The prosecuting attorneys and the local justices, all formerly appointed, were made elective, the former by the voters in the judicial circuits and the latter by the voters of the townships. In the county the voters were made the electors of a clerk of the circuit court, an auditor, recorder, treasurer, sheriff, coroner, and sur- veyor for each county. The General Assembly was given permission to establish other elective officers, a power which it has used quite liberally, if not fre- quently abused. Some of the officers so elected were eligible only for one term, but the majority were per- mitted to hold for two consecutive terms. In dealing with the suffrage, elections and office-holding, the gen- eral principles of Jacksonian Democracy then preva- lent were applied. In general the convention made the most liberal application of the principles of manhood suffrage and popular elections. It was accused in many places of playing politics by allowing unnaturalized citizens to vote after one year's residence.
In dealing with the negroes, both free and slave, the convention illustrated the confused political notions of the times. It reenacted the provisions of the Ordin- ance of 1787 with a bruskness that indicated an abso- lute majority of Abolitionists, yet the provisions refus- ing negroes the right to vote or even to settle in the State are, in spirit, directly contradictory to the above enactment. Not only these provisions, but the speeches of the members on the question of slavery, show the utmost diversity of opinion. Not less than forty set speeches on slavery, few of them dealing with any question before the convention, were made by the mem- bers.19
court. Formerly these had been published privately by Judge Isaac Blackford. The charge was made that he neglected his official duties in preparing the opinions for the press and that he made too much money off the volumes.
19 During the session James Rariden introduced a resolution endorsing the Compromise of 1850. This was done to break the
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.